 |
| MP Stephen Woodworth |
Commenting on motion M-312 to Life Site News, Conservative MP Stephen Woodworth also spoke about a recent medical paper that tossed around the idea of "after-birth abortion:"
In an interview with LifeSiteNews, Mr. Woodworth said his motion goes beyond the abortion debate, saying the evidence and principles that inform a Canadian law determining who is a human being, and who is not, have wider implications. “This initiative won’t end the abortion debate,” Mr. Woodworth said, “but may make evident that a law which denies that someone is a human being, without any relevant or scientific evidence, is not a just law.”
Mr. Woodworth made reference to a recent article titled, “After-birth abortion: why should the baby live?” that was published in the Journal of Medical Ethics, where two ethicists argue that even a new-born child may be denied the moral status of actual person hood and killed by “after-birth abortion” if the child might have been killed by abortion before she was born.
“We claim that killing a newborn could be ethically permissible in all the circumstances where abortion would be. Such circumstances include cases where the newborn has the potential to have an (at least) acceptable life, but the well-being of the family is at risk,” the ethicists stated.
Read the full story here.
No comments:
Post a Comment
Leave a comment about this post.